Hello!!
There is a topic which has much interest for me but I can't solve it.
If we look some european languages, we can observe this curious coincidence.

Spanish and romanic languages:
Yo he comido (Subject + form of to have verb+ past participe)
Yo he estado

English:
I have eaten (Subject + form of to have verb + past participe)
I have been

German:
Ich habe gegessen (Subject + form of to have verb + past participe)
Ich bin gewesen (Subject + form of to be verb + past participe)

In the german language, we find the use of form of to be verb. However, Italian language use the same process ("mi sono alzato").
This phenomenon is natural in romanic languages, although in classic latin perfect verbal times was synthetic (amavit). Except the perfect passive verbal times (amatus est), which use the form of to be verb. Thanks to (re)inventation of new present perfect (classic present perfect was being used as close past), appeared the formula "habeo + past participe" in vulgar latin.

Now, latin language in its imperialist context had this influence in english and german?
Do you believe that the influence of scholasticism makes this change possible?
We can't speak about a typical procces of indoeuropean languages, actually, latin and ancient greek have synthetic forms in perfect times.

In addition to this, why do german and italian use the form of "to be" verb? (specially in intransitive verbs)
Perhaps by heredity of the "amatus est" formula? Deponent verbs?

You could have a passive participle, but that is only possible for a transitive verb (so you can have "John was arrested/eaten"). "Died" is only a past tense verb, and that would mean that tense is instantiated twice in the same clause (you have tense only once).

This is a past participle (or past tense), as in "John died" (past tense) or "John has died" (past participle). But the first part of your explanation is correct there: the participle must be from a transitive verb.

Passives promote a non-subject to subject, and remove the subject as an argument of the verb (it may appear as an extra bit of information then, introduced with "by").

So the verb "die" does not have enough arguments (just one: no object like "John died his life"), meaning that there is nothing to promote to subject.

---

Now, you might wonder, what about not having a subject all? Well, that's generally not allowed, and at least in English you would need to fill in something like "It was died". Even in a language like Spanish where overt subjects are not required, there is still generally an understood subject (as indicated by subject agreement still found on the verb!), so that also wouldn't make sense: there must be a conceptual subject, even if it is not pronounced.

Interestingly enough, there actually are some languages that do allow passivization of intransitive verbs. In German, the verb "werden" (lit. 'become') works like English "be" in passives. And you can literally say "It was danced": Es wurde getantzt. -- meaning something like "There was some dancing going on; people danced." I'm not sure whether "Es wurde gestorben" would make sense to a German speaker ('there was dying going on'?), but it may be a grammatical possibility. But again, English does not allow for this.

Hi, can anyone tell me why the sentence "john was died" is ungrammatical?

Is there a grammatical category for what might be called the universal determiner "the" - as in "the spleen."  That is, not using the word "the" to refer to a specific example or member of a class (as in "the spleen was transplanted yesterday"), and not to refer to all the members as in the class (as in "the speens are all organs"), but rather to refer to all the members of a class in terms of a single member (as in "the spleen has many cells" or "the spleen is found in the abdomen").  This is found in scientific writing all the time in phrases such as, "the brain has many neurons," "the heart pumps blood," and "the human body is a living organism." 

Hi everyone,
I will need to retake the exam and I have no idea how to deal with the exam. I known that the retake exam will be different but this is not the case. I have notes from all lessons and I have read a few books, but sill I have no idea how to deal with it, can anyone help me with this? If this thread is in the wrong place please move it to the right one

[Attached images of exam removed by moderator.]